Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ulysses.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxi!houxm!ihnp4!ulysses!smb
From: smb@ulysses.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: comments on proposed computer crime legislation
Message-ID: <643@ulysses.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Oct-83 16:27:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: ulysses.643
Posted: Sun Oct  9 16:27:23 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Oct-83 10:30:46 EDT
References: <2416@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 8

There are several separate issues here that are often confused.  The
major questions are: (a) what are the general sorts of behavior that are
to be considered criminal; (b) why don't existing laws cover the
new offenses; and (c) how do we draft legal definitions that will cover
the proposed offenses without being overly broad.  This third point, it
seems, is the hardest one to solve; we as computer scientists are in
general not competent to do more than point out the technical flaws in
lawyers' drafts.